Hawk Photo - What should I have done? Camera settings or technique?

[Parker219]

I looked out my backdoor and saw this red shoulder hawk eating something on top of the post.

I ran to get my camera, but figured as soon as I opened the back door, it would fly away. So I tried to SNEAK quietly, with my D5300 and 18-300 lens, WITHOUT a tripod.

It was cloudy and a light drizzle was coming down, so the settings were ISO 800, f/5.6, shutter speed 1/1000. With the D5300 in low light, I cant go higher than ISO800, as you can see there is already some noise, which fits the rainy day, so I don't mind it, but anything higher would not be good.

I figured with that, I could freeze action, since I was figuring I would get a launch photo.

Well as expected, the hawk saw me and pretty much right away turned and flew away.

BUT, I was able to PRESS THE SHUTTER DOWN on sports mode...so I got a couple photos.

After the hawk flew away, I looked down on my little lcd screen, and was like WOW, I just got an AMAZING PHOTO! Then I get to my computer, upload it, and said WOW, I JUST GOT A CRAPPY photo!

Since the photo came out BLURRY, I am wondering, were my settings wrong, was I limited by the camera, do you think it was handheld camera shake? Or something else?

What should I have done different?

I WAS focused on the hawk right before he flew away, and was on tracking mode, however I dont know if the focus point was off or the shutter speed too low ( normally 1/1000 will freeze action right? ). I will post the shots right before he flew away, so you can see the whole story.

1. Yummy

2. Getting ready to "take his ball and go home".

3. I'm outta here!

 

[weepete]

Sounds like you missed focus. Did you have continuous focusing on and a single point (center) AF mode? 1/1000 should be adequate and you won't see camera shake on that unless you are shooting with a 700mm or greater lens.

 

[Parker219]

In sports mode, the focus is suppose to track the subject. The second shot is a split second before the third shot and its in focus.

 

[weepete]

Ah, I couldn't see the photos before as I had a crappie Internet connection. In tracking modes you camera has to decide what the thing you want it to focus on is. If you had multiple focal points active the camera may have decided to focus on another point that wasn't on the bird. Tracking systems are not perfect so they can hunt around a bit. I think that's what happened here.

 

[photoguy99]

It's possible that the AF system tracked the wing. Note that the bird is dominated by the black and white barred wing, while standing, but changes color quite radically when the wings are outstretched.

Possibly there's a bit of motion blur as well. I don't know how else to explain how the bird's body is apparently softer than the post, but at 1/1000 I don't know if that makes any sense.

 

[MSnowy]

Looks like your tracking mode stayed on the post.

 

[Overread17 5]

A few thoughts:

1) 1/1000sec is more than fast enough to free general action shots. You might not get wingbeats fully frozen (unless you catch them at a natural pause), but you'll certainly get the bulk of the action (wingbeats depends - falcons tend to be slower than many songbirds in my observation so should get a good sharp wing beat).

2) 1/1000sec is more than enough at 300mm to overcome handshake for a typical person with good standing and shooting posture (even more so if you are leaning on something when you shoot). So handshake isn't a problem (1/300sec would be the slowest, but its only a guideline - some people will be more and some less stable).

3) AF works by locking onto the closest point in the scene in which it can detect a contrast difference. Now this is limited by the active AF points that you select. So if you have a single AF point active you can point that at the point you want in-focus and the camera will set its focus to get that point in-focus.
If you leave it up to the camera or use a wider area selection of AF points then the camera will pick up on the nearest point it can - in this case it picked up on the post.
Note also that the combination of lens and camera will induce a lag-time on the AF - as well as the lighting conditions. This assumes that you are using continuous AF mode which constantly looks to check the focus - if you are in one-shot AF mode then it will only focus once and then keep that focus point set till you activate the AF again.

4) Sports mode is not all that special.
If I were you I'd shift into aperture priority mode - you set the aperture (f number) and the ISO and the camera sets the shutter speed based on those and the light reading. Set your AF how you like it (one spot - continuous is what I'd advise). You'll be in more control and be more likely to get the right settings because you can change up the settings as you need to (whilst in sports mode you're very significantly limited on what you can and can't do).

5) The shot looks a touch underexposed - this is very typical of bird shots against the sky because the bright sky fools the camera. Typically shooting against the sky with a bird I'd use +1 exposure compensation if in a semi-auto mode (like aperture priority) or overexpose by 1 stop in manual mode.
That way you get far more light - that will help significantly with getting the noise levels down.

6) You CAN and SHOULD go over ISO 800. In fact with this shot if you take in the advice in point 5 (overexpose) then you could have gone to f5.6, ISO 1600, 1/1000sec and likely gotten less noise. This is because whilst higher ISO numbers give more noise; underexposing also gives more noise. In fact if you underexpose and then brighten a photo up you will get more noise than if you'd exposed correctly at the time at a higher ISO (note for correctness sake we are assuming the expose to the right theory - google it as it will give you the basic idea - as well as prompt you to learn about the histogram on the rear LCD of the camera if you don't already use it).

 

[dannylightning]

the first 2 are pretty good, the 3rd one the camera chose to focus on something other than the hawk.

when I shoot wild life I shoot between 1/650 and 1/1000 most of the time, preferably 1/1000. my camera is good up to 6400 ISO before I notice allot of grain so i turn on auto ISO and set it to a maximum of 6400. the lens I use takes the sharpest shots at f/8 which is why I use auto ISO. Generally I will set my camera to 1/1000, f/8 and the auto ISO. Auto ISO chooses the proper exposure for me and I get good results this way plus I get the shutter speed I want to freeze the movement of the bird and I get the aperture that will give me the sharpest images with my lens. if I cant get a proper exposure due to low light than I will go to 1/650 shutter speed which seems good for stopping the motion of the bird but when I can go with 1/1000 the images usually seems to be even sharper.

I set my focus point so that I can choose where the focus point is. I do not let the camera choose for me or it may miss focus. on a mooving object its much easier to let the camera choose where to focus but there is a good chance you are going to get a shot like number 3. if there is anything else in the background that the camera may decide to focus on instead of the subject that you will probably have issue with missed focus some of the time, if there is nothing but blue sky in the background than the camera will usually focus on what you want.

when i am using a manual focus point this is the only draw back, say I am holding down the shutter button taking several photos of the subject and than the subject moves I will release the shutter button and press it again so the camera will refocus where I want it to. if i leave it held down than it will stay focused where it was, and since the object moved than meas it will be focused in the wrong spot. it does waist a little time having to focus on the moving object for every picture taken but it will almost always focus perfectly on what I want it to focus on.

 

[dannylightning]

one more thing, its always best to try to focus on the animals head or ever better its eyes if you can, since the head and the body can be on a different plane, depth of field may cause issues. if you focus on the body the body might be in focus but the head might not, when i get a shot like that I always scrap it.

I would rather have its head in focus than its body, ideally I want it all to be in focus but that is not always the case..

as you can see in this photo his head was not quite in focus because it was not on the same plane as his body but I did not scrap this photo since its the only blue heron I have found so far and its head was not badly out of focus here, he was also very far away and I had to crop the image allot. he was so far away that I could only see his body thew the lens and not his head so I had to focus on its body.

 

[bratkinson]

I'll be the oddball response guy on this one...

First, I'm guessing what you posted is a cropped picture, perhaps 30-50% of the original size. If so, the image quality is quite sharp...especially if the hawk is about 100 feet away.

If it's not cropped and the hawk is, say, 30 feet away, then the issue is depth of field (plane of sharp focus). If, say, the hawk is 30 feet away, plugging your numbers for your camera and lens focal length into the online depth-of-field calculator, then your DOF is about 8", good enough if the focus is 'right on', but if the focus is 2-3" in front of the post, the far side of the bird will not be in sharp focus. A slight 'front focusing' issue with that camera and that specific lens might be an issue. See Online Depth of Field Calculator

If your concern is about the blurry background in the image, that's very much expected with the relatively thin DOF for the shots. That's called bokeh. Many photographers are puzzled how to achieve a nice blurred background, and you got it 'naturally'. Having the post and hawk a significant distance in front of the line of trees to the rear created a 'really good' bokeh. All lenses will blur objects not in the plane of the depth of field (DOF). The further away from the DOF (I think of it as a number of sheets of plywood parallel to the camera sensor where everything is in focus), the more blurry they become. Had those trees been, say, 5 feet behind the hawk, the leaves would be somewhat distinguishable, but not in focus.

Second, at f5.6 at 300mm on your 18-300mm lens, the aperture is 'wide open'. Very, very few lenses are at their sharpest when wide open. Using f8, for example, would have likely made the bird 100% in focus...but you'd have to increase your ISO speed and/or slow down the shutter speed to compensate. Note, too, that super-zoom lenses (large focal length ranges) are almost always less sharp than zooms with less focal length range, with prime lenses almost always giving the sharpest results.

Lastly, in my estimation, given that you're using less than high-end equipment, I'd say the pictures are very acceptable image quality. While you might be inclined to expect super-sharp IQ with your gear, the gear that produces 'very sharp' images typically costs an arm and a leg...or two...or three... By the way, there's nothing wrong with doing a bit of sharpening during post processing. Most post processing software can reduce the little noise visible in your images to unnoticeable levels.

 

[Parker219]

Very good advice everyone! I read every word...twice...and will try out your suggestions.

 

[Parker219]

So after some more work in photo shop...I know it will never be a GREAT image, I just really like the shape of the hawk, so I am trying to make it the best it can be.

 

[bratkinson]

For a ho-hum grey day, I think the first of the sharpened shots above came out very good. I like the added vibrance of the birds' varied colors which make it stand out very well from everything else in the photo.

 

[dannylightning]

well you definitely fixed that up well. it looks allot better.